What it won't solve is the problem of graphic user-generated content.

Apple has pushed the age ratings for its App Store apps to the top of the product pages in an effort to make buyers, especially parents, more aware of the type of content they’re getting. The age ratings are now directly below the app-maker’s name, and they sit above the user ratings.

Apple has faced some disgraces lately with apps that have gained the spotlight only to blindside unexpecting users with adult content. The short-video sharing app Vine was featured as an App Store Editors’ Choice shortly before porn surfaced within the app’s Editors’ Picks; the image-sharing app 500px was also yanked for its pornographic pictures. Both apps now have a 17+ rating slapped on them.

While Apple’s new prominent app ratings won’t solve the unpredictable-user-generated-content problem, they will get parents and guardians to pay more attention to what kinds of apps they are downloading. This change also follows Apple’s addition of an “Offers In-App Purchases” label to app product pages to help account-owning parents anticipate which apps will allow their kids to wantonly bill items within an app—before they get the credit card bill.

Casey Johnston
Casey Johnston is the former Culture Editor at Ars Technica, and now does the occasional freelance story. She graduated from Columbia University with a degree in Applied Physics. Twitter@caseyjohnston

Is there really a need for fine-grained age ratings such as 4+ for non explicit content?

I understand that there are apps that might be more appropriate for a specific age range, such as 4-6 years, but it seems like the real issue is access to violent/explicit content as opposed to age-appropriate challenges which might be better judged by the child's parent.

The "Offers In-App Purchases" warning seems like a more useful aid for parents, as any app with a connection to the Internet could potentially receive content that was not anticipated by the initial rating, making the age rating less useful for protection of children.

While Apple’s new prominent app ratings won’t solve the unpredictable-user-generated-content problem, they will get parents and guardians to pay more attention to what kinds of apps they are downloading. This change also follows Apple’s addition of an “Offers In-App Purchases” label to app product pages to help account-owning parents anticipate which apps will allow their kids to wantonly bill items within an app—before they get the credit card bill.

I think this is a very good thing. Apple does not have the responsibility to police parents or kids, but if the issue de jour of our times is being able to potentially find explicit content on the store, Apple can cover itself by making changes like this.

"My child found this nasty app on your store!"

"Ma'am we have a wide range of content that our customers appreciate, not everyone parents their children in the same way. This is why we provide the crap your dumbass needs to know front and center in the app store so you can either make informed decisions, or stupidly ignore them while you are too busy preaching that a naked body is some how satanically evil."

Is there really a need for fine-grained age ratings such as 4+ for non explicit content?

I understand that there are apps that might be more appropriate for a specific age range, such as 4-6 years, but it seems like the real issue is access to violent/explicit content as opposed to age-appropriate challenges which might be better judged by the child's parent.

The "Offers In-App Purchases" warning seems like a more useful aid for parents, as any app with a connection to the Internet could potentially receive content that was not anticipated by the initial rating, making the age rating less useful for protection of children.

I'm assuming the ratings are there both for "there might be sex or violence here" things as well as "this game or app is more suited for kids in this age range" type things (i.e. a kids app about letter recognition vs a kids app about spelling). Possibility of boobies aside I'd really appreciate a recommended age and/or in-app purchase notification front and centre as it means you wouldn't have to go digging through piles of apps or games to see if one is well suited for a given kids abilities or not.

The article doesn't really address what the granularity of the ratings are however.

While Apple’s new prominent app ratings won’t solve the unpredictable-user-generated-content problem, they will get parents and guardians to pay more attention to what kinds of apps they are downloading

Oh, I think that's wildly optimistic to say that it'll get parents and guardians to pay more attention. If the whole ongoing fiasco over parents handing their kids their iDevices after typing in their passwords, and then complaining when those same kids rack up a whole bunch of in-app purchases has taught me anything, parents will blissfully ignore every warning and checkpoint that Apple installs, complain about how it was too easy for them to ignore those warnings and checkpoints, and demand more warnings and checkpoints, that they will then also ignore.

Oh, I think that's wildly optimistic to say that it'll get parents and guardians to pay more attention.

I know more than one set of parents that pay very close attention to this stuff.

Oh, I'm sure there are tons of attentive parents. But it won't stop the inattentive ones, who will still complain/sue after they have: unlocked their phones, typed in their passwords, ignored the age notice, hit "okay" on the warning that the app is age restricted, and then freak out when the eventually discover that their special snowflake got exposed to sex/violence/naughty words in an app that they downloaded.

In about 2 decades of work in a variety of jobs that all include some observance of customer interaction, I've come to realize that there's a sizable subset of the population that insists that other people are responsible for keeping them from doing stupid things to themselves. These are also the people who do most of the stupid things. And no matter how many things you do to try to keep them from doing stupid things to themselves, they will just raise the bar on their stupidity to exceed whatever safeguards you've put in place, and then tell you it's your fault for not anticipating their stupidity levels.

The new appstore has a lot of cool new stuff, but am I the only one utterly confused as to why, when you tap an app to actually look at it, we have gone from a fullscreen view to one using perhaps 50% of the display area - with everything much harder to view and things like ratings etc hidden away in seperate tabs.

It's fairly basic UI design that once a user has said "I want to look at that specific thing" you can make use of the most of the screen to, you know, let them look

It's not for them. You can't force anyone to sit up and pay attention if they don't want to.

That's why people continue to engage in self-harmful behaviors despite the many, many 'public service announcements' on billboards, radio and television. The effort has some value, because some benefit, even if many don't.

Is there really a need for fine-grained age ratings such as 4+ for non explicit content?

Need? Define "need" in this context.

Will society fall apart if four-year-olds are regularly accessing 9+ games? Obviously not. Might there be parents who appreciate being able to lock their 5-year-old out of any game/app rated for teenagers? Absolutely. So why not give them that option? There's plenty of valid reasons to control what a 5-year-old sees. It's not always "OMG, why are we so prude in the U.S.?"

I'm all for Apple making their age rating system work better for parents concerned about such things. Personally, if I were Apple I'd automatically assign an 18+ rating to any app that permits users to share content and be done with it. I'm also all for Apple forcing purchasers of their devices to select a maximum permissable age-rating for apps that are discoverable via their app store on that device (to ensure children using the devices are not exposed to something that their parents object to).

None of which means I think it's ok for apple to censor any form of content in their store that adults who purchase and use Apple's devices might wish to purchase.

TLDR: Apple should make an age rating system that actually works to gate off content where device owners desire it, and NOT to block conent where device owners do not want it blocked. Then focus their appstore approval process only on matters of security/stability, and assigning an objectively defined age rating to the app.

The new appstore has a lot of cool new stuff, but am I the only one utterly confused as to why, when you tap an app to actually look at it, we have gone from a fullscreen view to one using perhaps 50% of the display area - with everything much harder to view and things like ratings etc hidden away in seperate tabs.

It's fairly basic UI design that once a user has said "I want to look at that specific thing" you can make use of the most of the screen to, you know, let them look

For the same reason that the Appstore opens a link in a blank floating window, then loads every little icon for the storefront in the background, and then finally loads the app you actually wanted to see in the foreground. Apple only tests their stuff on an AirFibreChannel iPad prototype from 7 years in the future.